Here's when it will be safe to buy again
Your next chance will be after a new batch of complacent buyers gets blown away.
At some point we settle in. The sellers say why am I selling. The buyers say enough is enough, I am doing some buying. At some point the events of Ukraine get factored in, the confusing nature of bonds is accepted, and the upside shines through.
It's difficult now because we are so very quick to forget the painful times. It's been placid and sanguine. There hasn't been much of a reason to sell, and sellers have been unrewarded. It is their turn. You have to wait them out on individual stocks, though, not on the S&P, because many of the people selling S&P futures have been negative all along and now feel vindicated and empowered.
There are always schools of thought about how to handle sell-offs. Some people want to buy the stocks that have held up the best, betting that they are the strongest and they will rebound fastest. I have not historically been of that school, because if you are wrong about the selling, then you are in with a lot of weak hands playing that game.
Remember there are a ton of people who say: "I can't believe this stock is still up. Let me lock in that gain before they take it away."
I have much more been in the school of "I can't believe I am getting this bargain. I can put this one away or buy more because it is priced for imperfection rather than perfection."
Now, we all know that the backdrop has gotten bad. We all know people have written off whole cycles that were good a few weeks ago. They want to be early. You just have to ask what early is. Does Ford (F) go back to $15? Can you see GM (GM) at $31?
If so, I would say that unless you are a short-and-cover type, you don't take action. If you are intellectually honest and you think the cycle is over, then just go short and stay short, because if you have that level of conviction, GM goes to where it yields 5 percent and Ford to 4 percent, where they might have protection.
I think there's a lot of worry out there that's making consumers nervous. We tend not to think the headlines matter to earnings, but when you see the news, it doesn't make you feel that good times are ahead. So you might pause in your buying.
Plus, I think the chartists are playing a huge role here. We have seen some serious breakdowns that imply, for example, that a United Technologies (UTX), which traded at $120 not that long ago, could easily go to the mid-$90s. A 25 percent decline is of some magnitude for a company that missed its quarter. UTX simply didn't have as good a quarter as we thought.
So keep in mind when all is lost, it's not. Keep in mind that Putin wants Ukraine back but perhaps at a certain point he settles for some hegemony and the Western allies realize that perhaps the guys they are backing aren't the pristine good guys they are portrayed as.
Also, as much as it sounds callous to say, if Ukraine gets taken over forcefully by Russia and there is a coup, there's not much anyone can do about it anyway unless you want to start a hot war. All of this other stuff just says to the Western European politicians, "We are going to lose our jobs because of some godforsaken area that was never ours to begin with, maybe this is our Vietnam or our Iraq and we aren't going to go with President Obama into the abyss because he has nothing to lose and is just another American warmonger except of the Democrat variety."
I remain cautious, but less cautious when I see so many stocks down huge. We are losing the people who got in and don't know what it means to lose money.
Until they lose enough of it, the selling will continue. It will be truly safe to buy when another generation of complacent buyers -- the ones who paid up for stocks and now hate them -- gets blown away. Heartless but true.
More from TheStreet
Safe to buy?
We're going to bring two people infected with Ebola to Georgia so that the Center for Disease Control can fix them up with a couple of apirin and then send them off to Disneyworld.
I'd call that "not safe to do much of anything."
"We are going to lose our jobs because of some godforsaken area that was never ours to begin with."
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Every now and then old Cramer gets off a good one!
Hmmmm, looks like ms took down a couple comments...Of someone I know.
Good luck to you MSN.....Nothing like squelching the First Amendment...
On one other operation, shortly before Clinton left office;
There was supposedly a few Cruise missiles thrown in to get bin Laden...
He left about 15 minutes before the hits, we had leaks in our intelligence...
But using that as History and logic, some could say Roosevelt should have taken out Hitler too...
Well, forget about Georgia.
Drive right on through to Florida and go swimming in the ocean. Contract Vibrio vulnificus, the flesh eating virus.
If that doesn't put an end to surfing, I don't know what will.
Typical King Obama statement... "CEO's don't have the right to complain..." Such disdain for the First Amendment. Does this man realize in America anyone can complain about anything?
This man needs to go. Does this man even think before he says something? Talk about Biden being a loose cannon. His ARROGANCE knows no bounds. This November Democrats will hear from "We the People..." about King Obama...
A later report from the Iraq Study Group — which conducted the search for WMDs after the U.S. invasion — came to the same conclusion in 2004. “Two wars, sanctions and [United Nations monitoring] reduced Iraqi’s premier production facility to a stockpile of old, damaged, and contaminated chemical munitions (sealed in bunkers), a wasteland full of destroyed chemical munitions, razed structures, and unusable war-ravaged facilities,” the report reads.
The Wall Street Journal also reported the seizure of the Muthanna base three weeks ago. In that story, which AP later updated its own story to include, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki in a written statement said that the materials seized doesn’t include intact chemical weapons “and would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely use this for military purposes or, frankly, to move it.” The Pentagon’s spokesperson, Rear Adm. John Kirby,more recently, telling Reuters, “We aren’t viewing this particular site and their holding it as a major issue at this point. Should they even be able to access the materials, frankly, it would likely be more of a threat to them than anyone else.”
So while the reporting in the original Reuters and AP pieces on nuclear and chemical weapons materials remain solid, the headlines haven’t changed, leading readers who only skim the articles to believe the threat is much more severe than it actually is. Though Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has labeled ISIS as an interment threat to the United States, that threat won’t be coming from anything that the militants have seized in Iraq.
YOU KNOW ALL ABOUT THOSE W M D"s That do not EXIST
Hey here's surprise
Jew bashing and Christian bashing from guess who
our resident sandy muslim queen
LMFAO @ U little verminous muslim queen
Additional Major Releases Unlikely. Intelligence and UNSCOM information provide no basis for suspecting that stores of undiscovered munitions or bulk chemical agent were damaged during the Gulf war. We believe that Iraq generally tried to declare all damaged—and therefore useless—chemical munitions to demonstrate compliance with UN resolutions. In addition, given the detailed reliable information available on many aspects of Iraq’s CW program, it is unlikely that, during Desert Storm, there were additional chemical-agent-filled munitions close to or within the Kuwait Theater of Operations. Thus, we assess that additional Gulf war–era releases of chemical agents large enough to threaten exposure to US troops are unlikely, although additional small chemical releases may be identified.
No Chemical Weapons Use. On the basis of intelligence, UNSCOM, and DoD information, we continue to assess that Iraq did not use chemical weapons against Coalition troops. Iraqi use of mustard or nerve agents against Shiite insurgents immediately after Desert Storm is also unlikely.
Coalition Reports of CW. On numerous occasions, Coalition troops reported potential detection of, or exposure to, CW agents during military operations in the Persian Gulf. After reviewing DoD investigations, intelligence information, and testimony or reports from Congress, Presidential committees, and the press, we have not found any event we assess to be related to chemical agents or weapons. The IC will continue to support future DoD investigations related to such reporting.
We now assess that two Coalition incidents that we previously considered credible CW events—Czech CW detections in January 1991 and the blistering of a US soldier at the Iraq-Kuwait border in early March 1991—are unlikely to have involved chemical agents.
After conducting a multiyear study, we assess that CW agents reached US Persian Gulf war troops in only one case—the 10 March 1991 inadvertent release of nerve agent from the US demolition of Iraqi chemical rockets in a pit at the Khamisiyah Depot in Iraq. That release resulted in low-level nerve agent contamination of a significant area as published in the joint DoD-IC paper Modeling the Chemical Warfare Agent Release at the Khamisiyah Pit, 4 September 1997. In 2000, DoD published revised modeling of the Khamisiyah Pit release using updated CIA source assessments; this new modeling indicates that the area used for troop notification of potential low-level exposure has decreased by roughly half compared to the results published in 1997. However, the number of US troops to which DoD sent letters of notification actually increased slightly because of better information about their locations.
Iraqi Chemical Agents. The primary Iraqi chemical agents available for release at the time of Desert Storm were the blister agent sulfur mustard; the mixed nerve agents sarin and “cyclosarin” (also known as GB and GF, respectively); and the riot control agent CS—all well-known compounds. In addition, investigations of ballistic missile warhead fragments by the former United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) indicate a few warheads were filled with VX. It is unlikely that Iraq filled any weapons with other chemical agents, including any potential “exotic” chemical agents. We have no reliable information on chemical agents developed to cause long-term illnesses.
New Assessments of Chemical Agent Releases. Our study identified many possible releases of chemical agent from Coalition action or incidental causes (see ). Other than the previously mentioned Khamisiyah Pit release, the most significant release locations—Khamisiyah Bunker 73, Muhammadiyat, and Al Muthanna Bunker 2—were identified and assessed in previous CIA and IC reporting on Gulf war illnesses (see Bibliography).However, we have significantly decreased our estimate of nerve agent release amounts at the sites on the basis of additional analysis and subsequent information from UNSCOM. At Muhammadiyat, where Coalition bombing also damaged mustard bombs, our assessed mustard release amount has increased. Modeling and weather information—including 2000-2001 DoD modeling of Al Muthanna and Muhammadiyat using the revised release amounts—indicates contamination from these releases did not reach US troops.
We completed a rigorous search for additional Gulf war CW agent releases—no matter how small—and have identified additional releases. Only one of these additional releases was the result of Coalition military action—a release of mustard agent resulting from aerial bombing of the production plant at Al Muthanna. All other new releases involved leakage of defective Iraqi munitions. We assess these releases did not reach US troops because they were too small, too slow, or too far from US troops. We also identified several suspect release sites—related to Iraq’s declared unilateral destruction of chemical munitions—and we assess these also are unlikely to have been an exposure threat.
So even though Skynet was not given sole control of nuclear weapons (which was a stupid premise for the movies), it HAS been given control of the stock market. Just find a good algorithm, write the program and let it run, despite there not being any way to codify a good investor like Buffet--and even he isn't always right. I'm positive there's no way to make money trading any more, because if there were the algorithms would quickly soak up the advantage.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.
Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.
Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.